Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Tánaiste. Tá súil agam go n-éireoidh a gairm léi agus í ina post nua. Cé go bhfáiltímid roimh cuid de na beartais atá i gceist leis an mBille seo, tá an-imní orainn faoin próiseas atá á úsáid chun an reachtaíocht a thabhairt chun cinn. Although we appreciate that there are some very welcome elements in this Bill, we have serious concerns about the way it has been brought forward. I share many of the concerns raised by Senator van Turnhout. This is a very complex Bill with 30 different elements and four general areas. There are some very serious legal, social and ethical questions that should have been teased out more before the Bill even came to us here on Second Stage. We had first sight of this Bill last Thursday and it is already commencing Second Stage. There has been insufficient time to consider properly the Bill's contents in advance of this debate. In its Bills Digest, the Oireachtas Library and Research Service noted that it was not possible to deal at all with 14 sections of the Bill due to the short time between publication and Second Stage. There was no Oireachtas committee pre-legislative scrutiny stage despite the Government's many Dáil reform promises. This Bill requires a pre-legislative stage and today's debate should be adjourned until this has been done.

Proposals to introduce compulsory registration of fathers' names give rise to important ethical questions, some of which have been mentioned here. These should be thoroughly deliberated upon before we even begin to consider the practical content of any associated legislation. The proposed Children and Family Relationships Bill has been the subject of pre-legislative scrutiny by the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality and Defence. The heads of that Bill raise related matters and ethical questions. The two Bills should be considered together. The Civil Registration (Amendment) Bill should not be rushed through in this way.

Section 6 provides for compulsory registration of all fathers on birth certificates. Ethical questions include the child's right to their identity and information on medical history and genetics. As we all know, Ireland is a very small place and there are many issues that could arise because of that. Other issues include fathers' rights to involvement in their children's lives regardless of marital status and the safety and welfare of the child and its mother, as has been alluded to previously. Practical questions include the suitability of a statutory declaration process which may heap further trauma on some already vulnerable women on the one hand or become an unworkable farce on the other. These are all questions that require very thorough consideration. The Minister's desire to further shrink the one parent family payment scheme cannot justify the rushing through of this legislation with these important ethical questions left insufficiently considered.

Likewise, the proposal to divine and ban marriages of convenience gives rise to complex ethical questions of privacy and proportionality. All we need to do is look at the recent scandal over racial profiling relating to Roma children to see how that can happen in a very practical way. Despite having zero concrete knowledge of the scale of so-called marriages of convenience, this Bill proposes to introduce intrusive powers for registrars to examine intimate details of relationships involving a foreign national. Perhaps the Minister could provide us with statistics around so-called marriages of convenience. The registrar's opinion is to be based on a set of value judgments that have not been subjected to public debate or consideration. The potential for racial profiling is very significant. While we were speaking about foreign nationals who might be affected by this Bill, what struck me was the question of how people living in direct provision would be affected by this. These are people who were seeking asylum; who had to flee persecution in their own lands; who were unable to bring documents with them; who might have been in the asylum process in this country for eight, nine, ten or 11 years; and who do not have access to base documents in the country they fled. How would their situation be resolved if they want to enter into a civil partnership?

A very legitimate point was raised about the best interests of the child. While we are on this issue, I take this opportunity to raise the issue of children of asylum seekers who were born here. We have issues with a number of those children whose nationality is stateless to some extent. They were born here but, because of the legislation we have here, cannot claim Irish citizenship. It did not strike me until Senator van Turnhout spoke. There are teenagers who have come here, who are now coming to the age of maturity and who may wish to have children, etc. How will their situation be affected if they cannot have an Irish birth certificate or if they are in a stateless position?

This Government promised us openness, transparency, etc. Making this Bill available to us on Thursday and debating it today when it involves some very complex ethical, social and legal issues is simply not good enough. There should have been much more pre-legislative discussion and consultation on this Bill. Although many of the principles the Minister is bringing forward are important and we would agree with many of them, we feel there should have been far more teasing out of these issues before the Bill was brought before the House tonight.